How not to make a movie about dragon training

Now, I haven't seen the movie How to Train Your Dragon yet, but that won't stop me from picking on it. Some critics are wetting themselves praising the movie for its message of tolerance, as a young Viking lad discovers that rather than killing dragons, as is the custom of his tribe, he can work with them. I've read the book, and here's my problem - in the book, the Vikings don't kill dragons, they train them. Each Viking lad must catch and train a dragon to become a full member of the tribe, as dragons are very useful to the Vikings, essentially filling the role of dogs. The drama in the book comes from a different perspective on HOW to train dragons (hence the name), and that there's more to dragons than the Vikings think. If the book can be said to have any message at all, it is that the small and weak aren't completely useless, that adversaries can become allies in a common cause, and that baser instincts can sometimes be overcome.

Now, of course books must be altered to be made into movies, a direct conversion of most books would be terminally dull on the screen (see Harry Potters 1 & 2). But, this sort of massive change to the core sentiment of the book in an effort to create a better "message" is irritating bullshit. Especially when the message is tolerance; tolerance is overrated, and used as a weapon. Tolerance goes both ways. The people who seem to preach tolerance the most are some of the most intolerant people around, they're just intolerant of things they've gotten labeled as evil, like intolerant people.

The movie may be entertaining, the movie may be fun, but it corrupts the spirit of the book, and shouldn't have the same name, and I don't give a shit about the message.